24.01.2013 Views

THE ARCANE SCHOOLS - Fort Myers Beach Masonic Lodge No. 362

THE ARCANE SCHOOLS - Fort Myers Beach Masonic Lodge No. 362

THE ARCANE SCHOOLS - Fort Myers Beach Masonic Lodge No. 362

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

<strong>No</strong>ne but Master Masons are permitted to apply for affiliation; and<br />

every<br />

Brother so applying must bring to the lodge to which he applies a<br />

certificate of his regular dismission from the lodge of which he was<br />

last<br />

a member. This document is now usually styled a "demit," and should<br />

specify the good standing of the bearer at the time of his resignation<br />

or<br />

demission.<br />

Under the regulations of the various Grand <strong>Lodge</strong>s of this country, a<br />

profane cannot, as has been already observed, apply for initiation in<br />

any<br />

other lodge than the one nearest to his residence. <strong>No</strong> such regulation,<br />

however, exists in relation to the application of a Mason for<br />

affiliation. Having once been admitted into the Order, he has a right<br />

to<br />

select the lodge with which he may desire to unite himself. He is not<br />

even<br />

bound to affiliate with the lodge in which he was initiated, but after<br />

being raised, may leave it, without signing the bye-laws, and attach<br />

himself to another.<br />

A profane, having been rejected by a lodge, can never apply to any<br />

other<br />

for initiation. But a Mason, having been rejected, on his application<br />

for<br />

affiliation, by a lodge, is not thereby debarred from subsequently<br />

making<br />

a similar application to any other.<br />

In some few jurisdictions a local regulation has of late years been<br />

enacted, that no Mason shall belong to more than one lodge. It is, I<br />

presume, competent for a Grand <strong>Lodge</strong> to enact such a regulation; but<br />

where<br />

such enactment has not taken place, we must be governed by the ancient<br />

and<br />

general principle.<br />

The General Regulations, adopted in 1721, contain no reference to this<br />

case; but in a new regulation, adopted on the 19th February, 1723, it<br />

was<br />

declared that "no Brother shall belong to more than one lodge within<br />

the<br />

bills of mortality." This rule was, therefore, confined to the lodges<br />

in<br />

the city of London, and did not affect the country lodges. Still,<br />

restricted as it was in its operation, Anderson remarks, "this<br />

regulation<br />

is neglected for several reasons, and now obsolete."[92] Custom now in<br />

England and in other parts of Europe, as well as in some few portions<br />

of<br />

this country, is adverse to the regulation; and where no local law<br />

exists<br />

in a particular jurisdiction, I know of no principle of masonic<br />

jurisprudence which forbids a Mason to affiliate himself with more than<br />

one lodge.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!